刑法“假药”界定的妥当性辩护
发布时间:2018-08-08 15:53
【摘要】:药品管理法规定的按假药处理的法律拟制假药具有法益侵害的危险,将生产、销售此类假药行为纳入犯罪圈,从而在假药的界定上保持刑法与行政法的一致,不仅是法益保护、我国二元处罚体系和当前刑事政策的迫切需求,亦是假药犯罪之抽象危险犯属性的必然体现。在生产、销售假药罪的量刑上,完全否认部分法律拟制假药与实质假药在危害性程度上的区别,可能会导致刑事处罚的不公,应允许被告方进行危险反证。
[Abstract]:The legal fictitious medicine that is handled according to the law of drug administration has the danger of infringement of legal interests. The production and sale of this kind of counterfeit medicine are brought into the criminal circle, so as to maintain the consistency between criminal law and administrative law in the definition of counterfeit medicine, not only the protection of legal interests, but also the protection of legal interests. The urgent need of our dual punishment system and current criminal policy is also the inevitable embodiment of abstract dangerous crime attribute of counterfeit drug crime. In the sentencing of the crime of producing and selling fake drugs, the author completely denies the difference between the legal fictitious drugs and the real fake drugs in the degree of harmfulness, which may lead to the injustice of criminal punishment, and should allow the defendant to carry out dangerous counter-proof.
【作者单位】: 西南政法大学;
【基金】:中央财政支持地方高校建设项目“特殊群体权利保障与犯罪预防研究” 重庆市社会科学规划基金项目“城镇化背景下基本公共服务法制保障研究”(2012BS37)的阶段性成果
【分类号】:D924.3
本文编号:2172278
[Abstract]:The legal fictitious medicine that is handled according to the law of drug administration has the danger of infringement of legal interests. The production and sale of this kind of counterfeit medicine are brought into the criminal circle, so as to maintain the consistency between criminal law and administrative law in the definition of counterfeit medicine, not only the protection of legal interests, but also the protection of legal interests. The urgent need of our dual punishment system and current criminal policy is also the inevitable embodiment of abstract dangerous crime attribute of counterfeit drug crime. In the sentencing of the crime of producing and selling fake drugs, the author completely denies the difference between the legal fictitious drugs and the real fake drugs in the degree of harmfulness, which may lead to the injustice of criminal punishment, and should allow the defendant to carry out dangerous counter-proof.
【作者单位】: 西南政法大学;
【基金】:中央财政支持地方高校建设项目“特殊群体权利保障与犯罪预防研究” 重庆市社会科学规划基金项目“城镇化背景下基本公共服务法制保障研究”(2012BS37)的阶段性成果
【分类号】:D924.3
【相似文献】
中国期刊全文数据库 前10条
1 李立众;奸淫幼女的处罚:在法益保护与人权保障之间的抉择[J];政治与法律;2004年02期
2 姚贝;王拓;;法益保护前置化问题研究[J];中国刑事法杂志;2012年01期
3 吕英杰;;风险刑法下的法益保护[J];吉林大学社会科学学报;2013年04期
4 赵星;;法益保护和权利保障视域中的环境犯罪立法与解释[J];政法论坛;2011年06期
5 苏永生;;论我国刑法中的法益保护原则——1997年《中华人民共和国刑法》第3条新解[J];法商研究;2014年01期
6 米恒;;我国刑法机能的价值定位[J];黑龙江省政法管理干部学院学报;2009年04期
7 马聪;;刑法机能模式及当代中国之选择[J];刑法论丛;2009年02期
8 克劳斯·罗克信;樊文;;刑法的任务不是法益保护吗?[J];刑事法评论;2006年02期
9 周光权;;论刑法目的的相对性[J];环球法律评论;2008年01期
10 贾健;;维护社会共同秩序:刑法的根本目的证立——兼论刑法目的的双层构造[J];南昌大学学报(人文社会科学版);2014年02期
中国重要报纸全文数据库 前2条
1 本报记者 乐欣;以法益保护为核心建立刑法学体系[N];检察日报;2003年
2 华侨大学法学院 赖隹文;“私了”后被害人改变陈述是否包庇[N];检察日报;2011年
,本文编号:2172278
本文链接:https://www.wllwen.com/falvlunwen/xingfalunwen/2172278.html